Four popups and overlays in 15 seconds. What a trash website.
Reader mode is perfect for sites such as this.
Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
251–260 of 327 posts
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
These jobs are shrinking as low level apps get dumbed down... The process of creating a simple web site has gotten much much more complex as scripting languages have changed. I still can't believe we're compiling code for simple phone and web sites and apps. Corporations have lobbied to take away Net Neutrality, and to institute throttling and make running a personal web site much more expensive. Social media sites d…
Corporations have lobbied to take away Net Neutrality, and to institute throttling and make running a personal web site much more expensive. There is literally no impact on personal web sites. You neither pay more, nor are you throttled.
I would wager these unflintchingly ethical telcos are bideing their time on this one. The beancounters are probably salivating about ideas such as this one from a few years ago:
"In Portugal, with no net neutrality, internet providers are starting to split the net into packages," he wrote. "A huge advantage for entrenched companies, but it totally ices out startups trying to get in front of people which stifles innovation. This is what's at stake, and that's why we have to save net neutrality."[1]
[1]https://www.businessinsider.com/net-neutrality-portugal-how-...
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#253I find this post quite disappointing. I don't mean to come off harsh but it is quite naive and utopian and I cannot take the call to arms seriously. Saying the internet went wrong is like saying the invention of cars went wrong cause we still have car accidents. For every powerful force in the world, it will be a source of good and bad things. The internet has changed the world, increased communication, allowed peopl…
[deleted]
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#254I find this post quite disappointing. I don't mean to come off harsh but it is quite naive and utopian and I cannot take the call to arms seriously. Saying the internet went wrong is like saying the invention of cars went wrong cause we still have car accidents. For every powerful force in the world, it will be a source of good and bad things. The internet has changed the world, increased communication, allowed peopl…
How about the internet being used as a mass surveillance machine and the obliteration of producers in favor of consumers? That facet isn’t a drop in the bucket of internet usage. M I think focusing what it could be used for and what it has been used for isn’t the right way to approach thinking about it. The internet is by and large used for consuming content from a handful of corporations (disclaimer: I have no sourc…
Aggregating some 30 000 rss and atom feeds it became obvious to me what an echo chamber it is. It also becomes obvious how big media dictates the topics. The negative consequences are also obvious since big media has no intend to inform or educate you. For them it is all about the bottom line readership and revenue. shocking > informative. My endless thought experiment is: What is news? What should it be? Can we exclude some of the audience to involve some expertise in it? Should we provide real study material so that the reader may understand the context? Something constructive would be nice? Whatever the answer is, it isn't to just endlessly repeat and repost what newscorp wants us to talk about. It isn't our friend, it has no great plan for us to prosper.
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
>the obliteration of producers in favor of consumers More consumers begets more producers. I would assert you have better odds of producing in a wide variety of areas.
No, it does not. everyone is just following the most popular producers and the rest are basically irrelevant. Just look at the follower counts and how it drops off on any of the popular sites such as YouTube, twitch, patreon etc We got more consumers than ever, but they're all following the same people, centralizing it even more
Direct-to-consumer businesses have taken off due to the internet. It’s never been easier to start a sock company or glasses company etc. Historically you had to get in to the big box retailers to sell anything non-local but the internet has flipped that on its head. Even big platforms like eBay and Shopify (and even Amazon) are offering small businesses and individuals way more opportunities to sell than they would have had pre-internet.
Furthermore in a direct to consumer world, incumbency matters way less. People had fewer options pre-internet (whatever was at their local store) and now brands largely compete on quality (reviews/ratings) rather than pure placement and marketing.
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I would also agree the internet has been a huge net positive. I thought that not terribly long ago. I have to admit, though, that with every passing day I become less sure that it's really a net positive.
Agreed, I think there was a point, when we could still benefit from the pre-existing social trust network, that it was a net positive. Now that the pre-internet trust network has deteriorated, and with no trust mechanism built into the internet, it is rapidly devolving toward a net negative for social stability.
I think relying on the internet to have a trust mechanism built in is a bit like relying on our road-builders to ensure our vehicles are safe.
While the average internet user will just trust the sites and apps they use, there's nothing stopping those who are able from designing/building/using/sharing technology which they can reasonably trust. The building blocks are there (crypto / networking libraries etc.).
When open source software gets outlawed, I'll be worried.
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your posting this on a website that is pretty much exclusively links to other websites, "hey I made this" stuff, and people talking about their hobbies. I think it went /okay/.
HN is pretty niche. In some countries like the phillipines, most internet users stay on Facebook for almost their entire session. Even so their internet is filtered through Facebook Basics (and one could make the argument our internet is filtered through google). Even when looking at reddit in the western world, most people don't click the links, they stay on reddit. I would say we did get something wrong by not regu…
But in the "good old days" the entire WWW was pretty niche, wasn't it?
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve worked with and volunteered with an org who among other things got smart phones to our local homeless. Yes, it does help quite a bit. It’s a $50-100 setup and even without data they can go to any million places with free WiFi and get emails, call job listings, keep in touch with family members. It’s a pretty big deal to them.
I think you're comparing different things here. 1. Comparing the chances of a homeless person in the modern world with a smartphone, to a homeless person in the modern world without a smartphone. 2. Comparing the chances of a homeless person in the modern world with a smartphone, to a homeless person in a hypothetical internetless world (where noone can have a smartphone). The org you volunteered with dealt with comp…
>>>> Well, a homeless person with a smartphone has a hell of a lot better chance of getting a job than they did pre-smartphone, right?
>>>Not that I know the answer, but I would have to see a source on this. Why would a device that may increase access to job postings, but a non-homeless job candidate is much more likely to have than a homeless person, increase the chances of said homeless person in getting a job? I'm not even sure that the ability to access job postings is the main problem there.
>> [My reply about first hand seeing it]
>We're discussing comparison #2.
I think whatever meaning you had in another thread hasn't been in the one I replied to.
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s more like inventing the bicycle and then having it evolve into a car, where your initial idea was for a safe, economical, sustainable way to get from on point to another. Instead we paved over all the sidewalks with freeways to make room insanely large vehicles that crash into each other and kill everyone involved. Sure, they get from one point to another faster and help you transport things larger than you imag…
You know we truly live in amazing times when our society can support a large class of people so far removed from the need to produce and transport physical goods that they can imagine a scenario in which the ability to do so using machines rather than armies of peasants, slaves, and pack animals is some kind of perversion.
Huh I didn't realize freight trains were armies of peasants, slaves, and pack animals.
Re: Leonard Kleinrock on what went wrong with the internet
#260Ok, fine, ill go there, eventho you will hate me for it... hah....
Everyone should be able to publish and it should enjoy readership depending on its quality alone.
Platforms like HN and all the others offer guaranteed readership.
For example: If you are to write something about the current subject it would be a terrible write up if it talked about the Hindi vs Hindu typo. Horses vs cars would only be slightly less terrible.
My hand picked collection of "articles you should read" about the topic should not include such works. It just cant.
The difference is like that between getting on stage and sharing some insights or blabbering some raw thoughts over drinks with friends. We all have both qualities, which one should we use to write for the world?